Windows 7 vs Windows XP Performance: Literature Review
This literature review examines existing research comparing the performance of Windows 7 Professional and Windows XP Professional. It surveys both quantitative benchmark studies — using tools such as PCMark05, Passmark Performance Test 6.1, Geekbench, and Sunspider — and qualitative, observation-based comparisons. Key findings reveal that XP frequently outperformed Windows 7 in raw benchmark scores, while qualitative reviewers generally favored Windows 7 for usability and visual experience. The review also addresses security improvements in Windows 7, including enhanced memory protection, Data Execution Prevention, and USB encryption. The paper concludes by noting the limited body of literature available on this specific comparison and identifying methodological considerations for further research.
- Introduction: Framing the XP vs. Windows 7 comparison
- Software-Based Performance Tests: Benchmark studies using PCMark05 and Passmark
- Qualitative Testing: Observation-based user experience comparisons
- Security Improvements in Windows 7: DEP, memory protection, and firewall upgrades
- Conclusion: Synthesis of quantitative vs. qualitative findings
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clearly distinguishes between quantitative and qualitative methodologies, giving the reader a framework for evaluating conflicting findings.
- Synthesizes multiple independent studies rather than relying on a single source, strengthening the review's credibility.
- Acknowledges the limitations of each study type — for example, noting that benchmark results were obtained under ideal conditions that may not reflect real-world usage.
- Integrates a focused security discussion as a third analytical dimension, broadening the comparison beyond raw speed metrics.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative synthesis — grouping sources by methodology (quantitative vs. qualitative) rather than summarizing them one by one. This approach allows the author to identify a meaningful pattern: empirical benchmarks tend to favor XP, while user-experience observations tend to favor Windows 7. Drawing this contrast explicitly is a hallmark of effective literature review writing.
Structure breakdown
The review opens with a brief framing introduction, then divides its body into software-based benchmark tests, qualitative/observational tests, and a security-focused subsection. The conclusion synthesizes findings across all three areas and identifies methodological gaps, positioning the review as groundwork for a forthcoming primary study. This three-part body structure with a forward-looking conclusion is a standard and effective literature review format.
Introduction
Choosing the correct operating system for the task and setting in which it will be used is one of the most important decisions an IT professional has to make. The functional differences between Windows 7 Professional and Windows XP Professional can be found by reading product literature. However, when it comes to performance, one must consult those who have installed the software and perhaps tested it. The following literature review examines existing literature, as well as the methods used to compare these two operating systems.
Software-Based Performance Tests
A side-by-side comparison published in PCMag conducted a performance test of the two operating systems. At that point, Windows XP had been available for nearly a decade, yet it remained a popular operating system. Surprisingly, Windows XP outperformed Windows 7 in many categories. The study was conducted using a clean install of both operating systems on a 1.73 GHz Toshiba Satellite M45-S260 laptop with 1 GB of RAM and a 100 GB hard drive (Muchmore, 2009). This system exceeded the minimum requirements for both operating systems. The side-by-side comparison also included Vista, but those results are not considered for the purposes of this review.
In addition to the operating system, the researcher installed Microsoft Office 2007 Ultimate, Windows Live Essentials (including Mail, Movie Maker, Photo Gallery, and Messenger), and Picasa 3.5. The researcher reasoned that testing a PC with no programs installed would not accurately reflect how a system performs in a real-world setting. Startup and shutdown times were then tested for each OS, and a series of benchmark tests was run three times each, with results averaged for the final presentation.
Muchmore found that Windows XP started fastest at boot, and noted that the test machine had been built during the era when XP was dominant and the other two operating systems did not yet exist. Newer machines may start faster because they were built with those newer systems in mind. The results of this test are therefore most relevant to users upgrading from XP on an older machine, rather than purchasing a new system. Most users in this scenario will be upgrading on existing hardware, according to the article.
Muchmore's results showed that XP booted nearly ten seconds faster than the other two systems. Whether this is significant depends on user preferences; from a practical standpoint, the difference is not large. On shutdown times, Windows 7 was the fastest, finishing nearly eight seconds ahead of XP. XP outperformed Windows 7 in Picasa video encoding by nearly four seconds.
The researcher then used the PCMark05 benchmark to run eleven system tests, each representing a specific type of PC usage. These benchmarks covered hard disk access, 3D and graphics physics rendering, webpage rendering, file decryption, multithreaded video, audio, text editing, and image decompression. Each test produces a performance index score. Using this index, XP outperformed Windows 7 in almost every category. The test suggested XP would be better for running games, though the author noted that newer games requiring DirectX 10 or 11 will not run on XP.
Some newer software will not run on XP at all — Windows Live Movie Maker being one example. It would be unrealistic to expect software developed long after the operating system's release to be compatible. Therefore, users interested in newer software should not consider XP. The researcher also used Geekbench, a test developed by Primate Labs that includes a number of proprietary hardware-intensive tests. Improvements were observed from XP to Windows 7 in these results (Muchmore, 2009).
The author then tested all three systems using the Sunspider benchmark. The most notable difference was in JavaScript performance, where Windows 7 dramatically outperformed the other two. Running Firefox 3.5 on all three systems showed that Windows 7 was a striking improvement over the others. However, performance was considerably poor on Firefox 3.6 across all three platforms (Muchmore, 2009).
Muchmore's assessment did not show that Windows 7 was a drastic improvement over XP. Windows 7 offers more features and a more advanced interface, but such improvements are expected in any operating system upgrade. The more important question is which features matter most to the user. For instance, will the few-second difference in startup or shutdown time be noticeable to the average user? Windows XP performed better for power gamers, but that segment is also most likely to want the newest games, which will not run on XP. According to Muchmore, XP is beginning to show its age, and Microsoft must address its reputation for code bloat. Rather than relying on Moore's Law to compensate for inefficient code, Microsoft will need to write leaner software as market trends shift toward lower-power devices. Muchmore's study was among the most rigorously conducted found in this literature review.
In another study using Passmark's Performance Test 6.1, XP far outperformed Windows 7, achieving a score more than 100 points higher than the newer operating system (Joe C, 2009). Both systems received a clean install with identical software loaded. Tests were run three times, with average scores reported. The test PC exceeded the minimum requirements for both operating systems. XP led in all seven performance categories. The results suggested that users should retain XP unless they need to run newer, incompatible software. For the average user performing basic office tasks, browsing the web, or watching videos, XP was the preferred choice.
Conclusion
This literature review found that very few side-by-side comparisons exist between Windows XP Professional and Windows 7 Professional. Only sources that compared the professional versions of both systems were considered. The analyses could be divided into quantitative and qualitative categories. Quantitative assessments provided technical information useful for those who wish to base their selection on empirical data, and were primarily targeted at technically oriented professionals or consultants. Qualitative comparisons, also identified in the review, were better suited to the average user and written in a manner accessible to non-technical consumers. A third type of comparison — opinion-based reviews that cited no empirical methods and drew largely on the experiences of friends or coworkers — was excluded from this review, as such sources were not considered to contribute meaningfully to the academic knowledge base.
The number of relevant and useful pieces of literature found in this review was limited. Several key differences emerged between quantitative and qualitative findings. Quantitative methods tended to favor Windows XP over Windows 7, while qualitative methods concluded the opposite. This suggests that from a strictly technical standpoint XP is preferred, but from a user-experience standpoint Windows 7 is preferred. It was also noted that the type of system, the quantity and type of installed software, system maintenance history, and hardware condition can all dramatically affect the results of both quantitative and qualitative studies. This literature review found that quantitative studies generally accounted for these factors, while qualitative studies did not. These considerations will need to be addressed in the conduct of further research.
References
Bradley, T. (2009). Pros and cons of Windows 7 security. PCWorld, 23 November 2009. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from
Dunning, J. (2011). Windows tips and tricks: Windows 7 versus Windows XP. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from
Joe C. (2009). Windows XP vs Windows 7 — Benchmarks. 14 January 2009. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from
Muchmore, M. (2009). Windows 7 vs XP performance shoot-out. 10 November 2009. PC Mag. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2355703,00.asp
Williams, M. (2009). Windows compared: Windows 7 vs Vista vs XP. 13 July 2009. Techradar. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from http://www.techradar.com/news/software/operating-systems/windows-compared-windows-7-vs-vista-vs-xp-615167
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.